Ford Maverick Forum banner
21 - 40 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
I have driven a 2011 Ford Escape hybrid all wheel drive for 10 years now. I have mastered the technique of hypermiling feather touch acceleration coasting and never exceeding the posted maximum speed limit This really pisses people off. I have lived in three different states. Americans are all the same no matter where you live-jack rabbit starts and extreme braking. No weight in the vehicle I manage a consistent 27 miles to the gallon 350 per tank I have tried everything and no changes
keep in mind this a well kept suv always parked in the garage 53000 original miles l drive a truck for a living. I have read real mileage figures of owners of Prius niro and ioniq and all don’t deliver what is promised especially in winter time
Car Connection observed fuel economy 49mpg: Review update: The 2020 Ford Escape Hybrid nears 49 mpg on our watch

Car and Driver observed fuel economy 30mpg:2020 Ford Escape Hybrid vs. 2019 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid: Which Fuel-Sipping Compact Crossover Is Better?

Wheels observed fuel economy 37mpg: Escape Hybrid does everything well – WHEELS.ca

Daily Drive observed fuel economy 44mpg: Test Drive: 2020 Ford Escape Hybrid

Autoguide observed fuel economy 47mpg: https://www.autoguide.com/car-comparisons/2020-ford-escape-hybrid-vs-2020-toyota-rav4-hybrid

Fuelly 73 vehicle average fuel economy 38mpg: 2020 Ford Escape MPG - Actual MPG from 73 2020 Ford Escape owners

So far the worst tested fuel economy is from Car and Driver, and they notoriously get poor fuel economy as they drive quite aggressive in their tests, and even that was still 30mpg. shrugs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
I have driven a 2011 Ford Escape hybrid all wheel drive for 10 years now. I have mastered the technique of hypermiling feather touch acceleration coasting and never exceeding the posted maximum speed limit This really pisses people off. I have lived in three different states. Americans are all the same no matter where you live-jack rabbit starts and extreme braking. No weight in the vehicle I manage a consistent 27 miles to the gallon 350 per tank I have tried everything and no changes
keep in mind this a well kept suv always parked in the garage 53000 original miles l drive a truck for a living. I have read real mileage figures of owners of Prius niro and ioniq and all don’t deliver what is promised especially in winter time
posted speed limits are actually essentially arbitrary according to a lot of credible studies, it's safer (and just as good at fuel economy) to drive at ambient speed +/- 5% rather than the speed limit and then using the transmission to slow down before you need to use the brakes. I pull off 32 mpg in a 1.0L Focus in town, and have hit 40 on the highway on road trips, if I'm going downhill more than up. Granted, I get better control over the trans than your Escape, but you have regenerative braking. I get better mileage on road trips than my wife's hybrid Sonata.

I suspect the Mav hybrid will probably return something like 35 mpg maximum, honestly. Towing and hauling will have a proportional effect on mileage, obviously. The reports of Ford reps getting 30 on the highway between stops in Ecoboost Mavs is promising to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
posted speed limits are actually essentially arbitrary according to a lot of credible studies, it's safer (and just as good at fuel economy) to drive at ambient speed +/- 5% rather than the speed limit and then using the transmission to slow down before you need to use the brakes.
A myth perpetuated by speeders.

Legitimate studies have shown that young males in particular tend to be competitive by nature and have poor risk management strategies, and will stereotypically try to drive faster than other cars around them (faster even than if no one were around), reigned in only by the threat and probability of law enforcement punishment. If speed limits are set to 80mph, they will drive 90-100mph. If speed limits are 90mph, they will drive 100-110mph, etc. Speed limits and the degree of enforcement within an area tend to dictate the average speed of traffic, as drivers tend to weigh getting a speeding ticket more than actual safety concerns and only worry about limiting how much they stand out from the group in their speeding.

55mph speed limits that were implemented to reduce fatalities, emissions, and fuel consumption were highly effective, simply because of basic physics that lower speeds translate into less momentum compared to available traction, and that drag increases with the square of speed. That's why when setting land speed records it takes more and more ludicrous power levels to break the previous record.

For peak efficiency, very slow acceleration is actually not required, as seen by the FedEx and UPS driver's training guides where they have done extensive studies showing that overly slow acceleration has no real benefit due to decreased volumetric efficiency where only cracking the throttle body to limit power is inefficient pulling such a strong vacuum. More throttle but with lower RPM shift points was more efficient for moderate but efficient acceleration, and reduced cruising speeds to reduce drag losses. So accelerate at a normal pace, the automatic will generally try to shift early to keep throttle body more open for a given acceleration to improve efficiency and reduce internal frictional losses, and try to keep your cruising sped on the highway under 70mph to get best hypermiling results. This is also best observed with small battery EVs, as you can really tell how much highway cruising speed affects range with the battery depleting much faster at 80mph than at 60mph.

Most vehicles will see peak fuel efficiency at a lowly 35-45mph cruising speed, depending on the vehicle's aerodynamics. Here are data points for a Nissan Sentra as an example, MPG measured after long cruises in 5mph increments. Mileage is lower at very low speeds because of accessory drains like the air-conditioner that were running, but you can see why 55mph was chosen previously by the government since that's the point where we start to notice exponential decrease in efficiency on a vehicle with average aerodynamic drag.
1331
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
A myth perpetuated by speeders.

Legitimate studies have shown that young males in particular tend to be competitive by nature and have poor risk management strategies, and will stereotypically try to drive faster than other cars around them (faster even than if no one were around), reigned in only by the threat and probability of law enforcement punishment. If speed limits are set to 80mph, they will drive 90-100mph. If speed limits are 90mph, they will drive 100-110mph, etc. Speed limits and the degree of enforcement within an area tend to dictate the average speed of traffic, as drivers tend to weigh getting a speeding ticket more than actual safety concerns and only worry about limiting how much they stand out from the group in their speeding.
I'm sorry, but that assertion is not borne out by fact. Here's a study from the National Motorist Association (a non-profit motorist advocacy group) debunking it: Do Speed Limits Matter? - National Motorists Association as well as a study by the federal Dept. of Transportation, http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa09028/resources/TRR1779-SynthesisofStudies.pdf which concluded that "• Many studies favor the use of a speed limit to reduce speed variance and encourage stable flow to further improve safety. However, an inappropriate speed limit is easily violated. Therefore, the speed limit must reflect real-time road, traffic, and weather conditions. A speed-limit calculation should be based on traffic flow prediction, prevailing speed, and environmental factors, so that the limit will be accepted by most drivers. This calls for variable speed limits."

Drivers drive at the speed they feel safe at, it's not an automatic "speed limit+10 mph".

55mph speed limits that were implemented to reduce fatalities, emissions, and fuel consumption were highly effective, simply because of basic physics that lower speeds translate into less momentum compared to available traction, and that drag increases with the square of speed. That's why when setting land speed records it takes more and more ludicrous power levels to break the previous record.
Again, that assertion is not borne out by facts. They were implemented as a response to the 1973 oil embargo, in a misguided attempt to improve efficiency and make America burn less fuel. That was unsuccessful, since we were still driving '60s and '70s land yachts that weren't designed with efficiency in mind. According to this 2008 study by the US Government Accountability Office, located here: Energy Efficiency: Potential Fuel Savings Generated by a National Speed Limit Would Be Influenced by Many Other Factors "Lowering speed limits can potentially reduce total fuel consumption. According to literature we reviewed examining the impact of the national speed limit enacted in 1974, the estimated fuel savings resulting from the 55 mph national speed limit ranged from 0.2 to 3 percent of annual gasoline consumption. According to DOE’s 2008 estimate, a national speed limit of 55 mph could yield possible savings of 175,000 to 275,000 barrels of oil per day.6 This range is consistent with estimates of the impact of the past national speed limit. According to the Energy Information Administration, total U.S. consumption of petroleum for 2007 was about 21 million barrels of oil per day"

0.2 to 3% is within the margin of error for most statisticians. Not statistically significant.

You are correct that lower speeds do tend to result in fewer fatalities as a result of physics, but that also ignores the prevalence of driver assistance technologies like TCS, STM, ABS, ACC, lane keeping assist, and other collision avoidance technologies, and more safely designed vehicles with crash structures that don't include part of the driver's body as a crumple zone. You're statistically less likely to crash now than you were 20 years ago, and that crash is far less likely to be fatal.

For peak efficiency, very slow acceleration is actually not required, as seen by the FedEx and UPS driver's training guides where they have done extensive studies showing that overly slow acceleration has no real benefit due to decreased volumetric efficiency where only cracking the throttle body to limit power is inefficient pulling such a strong vacuum. More throttle but with lower RPM shift points was more efficient for moderate but efficient acceleration, and reduced cruising speeds to reduce drag losses. So accelerate at a normal pace, the automatic will generally try to shift early to keep throttle body more open for a given acceleration to improve efficiency and reduce internal frictional losses, and try to keep your cruising sped on the highway under 70mph to get best hypermiling results. This is also best observed with small battery EVs, as you can really tell how much highway cruising speed affects range with the battery depleting much faster at 80mph than at 60mph.

Most vehicles will see peak fuel efficiency at a lowly 35-45mph cruising speed, depending on the vehicle's aerodynamics. Here are data points for a Nissan Sentra as an example, MPG measured after long cruises in 5mph increments. Mileage is lower at very low speeds because of accessory drains like the air-conditioner that were running, but you can see why 55mph was chosen previously by the government since that's the point where we start to notice exponential decrease in efficiency on a vehicle with average aerodynamic drag.
That GAO study also included studies on a number of vehicles determining where their best fuel economy happened, but notably contains no data points for any speed above 55mph for the compared vehicles, and it also calls out that fuel injection, computer controls, transmission efficiency, vehicle weight, and a host of other factors contribute to better or worse economy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Here's a study from the National Motorist Association (a non-profit motorist advocacy group)
Special interest member only group that wants to eliminate most driving laws. Their general motto is "fascists, I do what I want!". The most important quote is from their own words though:
The question, “Do speed limits matter?” hardly seems worthy of an answer. Insurance companies, police agencies, state transportation departments, and national safety organizations would have us believe that speed limits are a critical component of traffic regulation.
Basically, everyone that is an authority and whose opinion should be taken seriously. Regarding the federal dept of transportation, who should be taken seriously, their suggestion is not for higher speed limits, but for LOWER speed limits in adverse conditions such as when there is heavy rain or fog to further improve safety. Here's the very first part of that link that you didn't quote which basically says "speed kills":
FHWA said:
Studies indicate that the most prevalent source of human error contributing to collisions may be speed.
This isn't rocket science, the higher the speed:
  • The less reaction time you have
  • The longer it takes to stop
  • The more likely a vehicle is to lose control
  • The more likely a vehicle is to flip
  • The more energy is involved in an impact
  • The harder it is to execute an emergency maneuver while maintaining control
  • The more energy is required to sustain that speed
  • The higher emissions will be to produce those higher required energy levels
Here is one of the largest automotive youtubers and very trusted in the community, Alex on Autos, and the results show that fuel economy drops quickly and noticeably with speeds above 55mph:
I'm driving a far less aerodynamic vehicle as my daily right now, a Ram 1500, and can assure you that numbers on a vehicle like mine will be even more pronounced, which is why I hit the cruise at 65mph and get noticeably higher fuel economy than if I try to cruise at 80mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Special interest member only group that wants to eliminate most driving laws. Their general motto is "fascists, I do what I want!". The most important quote is from their own words though:

Basically, everyone that is an authority and whose opinion should be taken seriously. Regarding the federal dept of transportation, who should be taken seriously, their suggestion is not for higher speed limits, but for LOWER speed limits in adverse conditions such as when there is heavy rain or fog to further improve safety. Here's the very first part of that link that you didn't quote which basically says "speed kills":

This isn't rocket science, the higher the speed:
  • The less reaction time you have
  • The longer it takes to stop
  • The more likely a vehicle is to lose control
  • The more likely a vehicle is to flip
  • The more energy is involved in an impact
  • The harder it is to execute an emergency maneuver while maintaining control
  • The more energy is required to sustain that speed
  • The higher emissions will be to produce those higher required energy levels
Here is one of the largest automotive youtubers and very trusted in the community, Alex on Autos, and the results show that fuel economy drops quickly and noticeably with speeds above 55mph:
I'm driving a far less aerodynamic vehicle as my daily right now, a Ram 1500, and can assure you that numbers on a vehicle like mine will be even more pronounced, which is why I hit the cruise at 65mph and get noticeably higher fuel economy than if I try to cruise at 80mph.
You're not wrong on those points. But an unintended side effect of overzealous speed enforcement (at least in my city, they have mobile traffic cameras) is that people invariably get scared into going below the speed limit, or brake suddenly when they see the camera trucks, which is more dangerous than just carrying on at the speed limit. They don't even provide a revenue stream to our municipality as they're operated by an out of state firm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
You're not wrong on those points. But an unintended side effect of overzealous speed enforcement (at least in my city, they have mobile traffic cameras) is that people invariably get scared into going below the speed limit, or brake suddenly when they see the camera trucks, which is more dangerous than just carrying on at the speed limit. They don't even provide a revenue stream to our municipality as they're operated by an out of state firm.
Nothing wrong with going below the speed limit. If there's no traffic, in TX at least you can go as slow as 40mph highway. For example, TX has some stretches that are even 80mph roads, but you don't have to go close to that, limit just means you can't go faster. You just have to make sure you're yielding and staying right.

Slamming on the brakes would be dangerous behavior, but that's also really easy for cops to spot when watching oncoming traffic, and someone that does that I'd certainly pull over as they were not only speeding but were reckless driving erratically. People driving under the speed limit generally don't worry about cops at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Nothing wrong with going below the speed limit. If there's no traffic, in TX at least you can go as slow as 40mph highway. For example, TX has some stretches that are even 80mph roads, but you don't have to go close to that, limit just means you can't go faster. You just have to make sure you're yielding and staying right.

Slamming on the brakes would be dangerous behavior, but that's also really easy for cops to spot when watching oncoming traffic, and someone that does that I'd certainly pull over as they were not only speeding but were reckless driving erratically. People driving under the speed limit generally don't worry about cops at all.
these aren't cops, they're automated camera trucks. And it's not so much that they make people go under the speed limit, it's that people SUDDENLY start going under the speed limit, WHEN THEY SEE THEM. Which is dangerous. I don't worry about them, because I know that they're calibrated at 10mph over the speed limit (it became too hard for the out-of-state company bleeding money from our state to fight tickets under 10mph, especially when the damn things are unconstitutional in the first place because I can't face my accuser in court)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
I have driven a 2011 Ford Escape hybrid all wheel drive for 10 years now. I have mastered the technique of hypermiling feather touch acceleration coasting and never exceeding the posted maximum speed limit This really pisses people off. I have lived in three different states. Americans are all the same no matter where you live-jack rabbit starts and extreme braking. No weight in the vehicle I manage a consistent 27 miles to the gallon 350 per tank I have tried everything and no changes
keep in mind this a well kept suv always parked in the garage 53000 original miles l drive a truck for a living. I have read real mileage figures of owners of Prius niro and ioniq and all don’t deliver what is promised especially in winter time
My Niro over-delivers in mpg’s in warm weather. I avg. 52-58mpg. But—-in cold weather drops to an average of 42-47mpg and I am in northern california so rare freezing temps and no snow. ICE comes on—-stays on longer in cold temps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Maverick H is looking better all the time! Gas is currently $1.40l or $5.50 gal. here with no end in sight.
Give me a "Thanks Biden" for cancelling the basically completed pipeline. Even a year later they are still spending more money and resource dismantling it when it would have already been completed. I think high fossil fuel prices were a goal though, as their donors are from alternative energy, same reason fuel in California is inexplicably twice the price as elsewhere. Even Trudeau was pissed, because transporting crude by trucks, trains, or barges is not only far less efficient and environmentally friendly, but far more prone to potential disaster than a stationary pipe that has sensors and cutoff valves at regular intervals. Sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
The Keystone has been operating for years just east of where I live. Kansas was even kind enough to give them tax abatements so the counties couldn't collect any revenue for years and had to repair the roads they tore up etc. Thankyou Biden from the Trump nightmare but it's still not over. The Trump has ruined family relationships and certainly hasn't helped with the covid as most of the nonvaxxers are Trump supporters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
The Keystone has been operating for years just east of where I live. Kansas was even kind enough to give them tax abatements so the counties couldn't collect any revenue for years and had to repair the roads they tore up etc. Thankyou Biden from the Trump nightmare but it's still not over. The Trump has ruined family relationships and certainly hasn't helped with the covid as most of the nonvaxxers are Trump supporters.
Woah, that was a really random reply. I have no idea what you are talking about with Kansas taxes, but I can assure you it has nothing to do with why fuel prices are so high in Canada, but cancelling the pipeline certainly does. Ruined family relationships? Again, what does this have to do with gas prices, I'm totally lost? COVID shutdowns I suppose could have something to do with supply chain problems that could increase costs, but the highest rate of infection and lowest vaccination rate demographic wise is among the black American population that primarily vote Biden (over 90%), and its the Biden administration that has been condoning shut down over reopening the economy. Hyperinflation is of course another factor, but again those are economic policies of the current administration. In any case, its pretty obvious that pipelines are a cheaper way of transporting crude to refineries than by trucks, ships, and trains, so I'm not sure how you're doing the mental gymnastics to get around the basic economics of that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
The Keystone has been operating for years just east of where I live. Kansas was even kind enough to give them tax abatements so the counties couldn't collect any revenue for years and had to repair the roads they tore up etc. Thankyou Biden from the Trump nightmare but it's still not over. The Trump has ruined family relationships and certainly hasn't helped with the covid as most of the nonvaxxers are Trump supporters.
Idiot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Idiot. Excuse me. And to the poster who said the blacks are causing covid spikes. They are a minority compared to the Trump voters who are unvaccinated. 90 percent of local hospitals with covid patients are theunvaxxed. If you don't understand how Trump has divided the country I can't help you. Look up taxes and keystone and Kansas. The pipeline wouldn't bring gas prices down in the USA. It is tar sands that is hard to refine and would be exported via the gulf.
Give me a "Thanks Biden" for cancelling the basically completed pipeline. Even a year later they are still spending more money and resource dismantling it when it would have already been completed. I think high fossil fuel prices were a goal though, as their donors are from alternative energy, same reason fuel in California is inexplicably twice the price as elsewhere. Even Trudeau was pissed, because transporting crude by trucks, trains, or barges is not only far less efficient and environmentally friendly, but far more prone to potential disaster than a stationary pipe that has sensors and cutoff valves at regular intervals. Sad.
I never heard of the tar sands going to the gulf would go to California. That's a new one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
And to the poster who said the blacks are causing covid spikes. They are a minority compared to the Trump voters who are unvaccinated.
One, I didn't say that, I said that if you're going to single out a demographic, we know that the highest rate of non-vaccinated and infected is of the black American population and the second is hispanic american, and of non-Americans we know approximately 30% of detained border trespassers are refusing vaccination and a huge number of infected are arriving that are distributed throughout the border states and are one of the primary causes for the number spikes due to the massive influx. No entity to date collects "Trump voter" as a recognizable demographic for COVID statistics, nor are the typically low population density rural populations you are referencing hot spots in the least.
Look up taxes and keystone and Kansas.
Sure, right after you explain what that has to do with gasoline prices in Canada, unless you're just so desperate that you're randomly throwing out anything you can think of in defense of Biden no matter how off topic it is to fuel prices that we're talking about.
I never heard of the tar sands going to the gulf would go to California. That's a new one.
You seem to be very confused. You're responding to this statement: "I think high fossil fuel prices were a goal though, as their donors are from alternative energy, same reason fuel in California is inexplicably twice the price as elsewhere." If English isn't your first language, to break that down, it is referencing a concerted political effort from the far left to raise fossil fuel prices (including gasoline) by whatever means are necessary, such as all the ways that California, a far left state politically, has managed to drive its fuel prices through the roof on purpose. If you don't believe the far left (which has recently taken control of the Democrat party) is highly hostile to fossil fuels, just look at Biden's endorsement of the "Green New Deal" that would decimate the Western economy, way of life, and lead to widespread poverty and suffering with suicidal plans like eliminating everything from air travel, to nuclear power, to cattle, to replacing every building in America.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
One, I didn't say that, I said that if you're going to single out a demographic, we know that the highest rate of non-vaccinated and infected is of the black American population and the second is hispanic american, and of non-Americans we know approximately 30% of detained border trespassers are refusing vaccination and a huge number of infected are arriving that are distributed throughout the border states and are one of the primary causes for the number spikes due to the massive influx. No entity to date collects "Trump voter" as a recognizable demographic for COVID statistics, nor are the typically low population density rural populations you are referencing hot spots in the least.

Sure, right after you explain what that has to do with gasoline prices in Canada, unless you're just so desperate that you're randomly throwing out anything you can think of in defense of Biden no matter how off topic it is to fuel prices that we're talking about.

You seem to be very confused. You're responding to this statement: "I think high fossil fuel prices were a goal though, as their donors are from alternative energy, same reason fuel in California is inexplicably twice the price as elsewhere." If English isn't your first language, to break that down, it is referencing a concerted political effort from the far left to raise fossil fuel prices (including gasoline) by whatever means are necessary, such as all the ways that California, a far left state politically, has managed to drive its fuel prices through the roof on purpose. If you don't believe the far left (which has recently taken control of the Democrat party) is highly hostile to fossil fuels, just look at Biden's endorsement of the "Green New Deal" that would decimate the Western economy, way of life, and lead to widespread poverty and suffering with suicidal plans like eliminating everything from air travel, to nuclear power, to cattle, to replacing every building in America.
You're wrong on so many levels but let's let it go and concentrate on Maverick's HUH? Didn't need to blame Biden but you did.
 
21 - 40 of 43 Posts
Top